Talk:Atys of Lydia

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Merge. Ucucha 00:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Atys father of Lydus → Atys (king of Maeonia) — Relisted. There is consensus that the current title is inappropriate, but no consensus yet whether it should be moved to Atys (king of Maeonia) or Atys of Maeonia. Ucucha 16:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposing to move the current title, lacking even a comma, to one under Atys's own title, "king of Maeonia". There another king named Atys: Atys (king) of Alba Longa, that one Roman and belongs arguably more to mythology than to history, unless they emanate from the same reference by reason of cultural affinities. I will add a move request for that from Atys (king) to "Atys (king of Alba Longa)", making a distinction between Maeonia (Lydia) and Alba Longa, if this one is accepted. — Cretanforever (talk) 17:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'm not sure this move is entirely thought out. Why King of Maeonia and not King of Lydia. A search of reliable sources produces far more hits for King of Lydia and King of Maeonia, not to mention the list of kings is List of Kings of Lydia. Secondly, what about Atys son of Croesus who was also king of Lydia/Maeonia. I suggest the following;
  • Atys father of Lydus → Atys of Maeonia, per convention of WP:NCROY.
  • Atys son of Croesus → Atys of Lydia, since the Kingdom becomes known as Lydia (not Maeonia) after with the reign of Lydus and the reign of Atys son of Croesus is after that of Lydus.
  • Atys son of Croesus → Atys (son of Croesus), My error on the previous one. Having never been king WP:NCROY does not apply. For people whose primary interest to history is his (or her) relationship to another person, WP:ROMANS suggest employing disambiguation by that relation. It seems like a novel solution to the issue.--Labattblueboy (talk) 17:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Atys (king) → Atys of Alba Longa or Atys (mythology) to follow the model of Agrippa (mythology)
    • On second thought I have to agree with Skinsmoke.--Labattblueboy (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thoughts?--Labattblueboy (talk) 19:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

• Comment Appears to fall into the conventions on royalty. If that is the case, seems a straightforward case that it should be Atys of Maeonia as Labattblueboy suggests. That would leave the other two to become Atys of Lydia and Atys of Alba Longa. Not sure I like the alternate suggestion of Atys (mythology). Couldn't that apply to any of them? Skinsmoke (talk) 05:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
• Comment Atys of Maeonia could also very well imply Atys son of Croesus (article badly in need of being upgraded, by the way), if one equates Maeonia and Lydia based on the viewpoint that Maeonia simply became Lydia after Lydus, son of this Atys. Atys son of Croesus was not a king. Therefore the principal point which distinguishes two Anatolian Atys is that, in the light of the knowledge -of any sort- we possess, one was king and other was not. Therefore Atys (king of Maeonia) seems to me to offer the clearest distinction, according also due attention to the fact that one can not speak of Lydia before Lydus, but of Maeonia. Cretanforever (talk) 11:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The Atys (king of Maeonia) option runs contrary to WP:NCROY and I don't think I can support it. Hatnotes were created specifically to resolve such issues and I would agree that one here might be appropriate.--Labattblueboy (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• Merge with List of kings of Lydia. This is a permastub about a figment from Hellenistic genealogies, neither sound history nor actual myth. Everything known about him (except the unreliable ancient sourcing) is in the article title. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Agree. Merge this and several others with List of kings of Lydia. All of the info in the article is easily contained in the current format of that article. — AjaxSmack 04:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I could equally support a merge.--Labattblueboy (talk) 14:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Atys (King of Maeonia)

Hello Uchucha. Thank you for closing the queer turn the discussion was taking on my proposal for renaming Atys, father of Lydus to Atys (King of Maeonia). I responded to one user who seemed straight but an impression from past contacts is present in my mind for some of the later participants to the discussion, upon which I abstained from taking part in it further. I will put forth a new proposal in due time because now, we have a King of Lydia, or any king of any sort for that matter, without an article of his own and should make do within a list. Whereas this is not case for his namesake Atys (king) of Alba Longa, nor would it have been, if the thing had any regents, for the otherwise mysterious Kingdom of Kurdistan. :) Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It was indeed a strange turn; I have never before or after closed a requested move as "Merge". But consensus was clear. I understand Atys father of Lydus now stands out from other kings of the period in having no article, but perhaps there are more articles that would better be merged into lists, since there is simply nothing substantial known about these persons. Ucucha 11:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

In a similar vein, I separated Car (King of Caria) and Car (King of Megara) who were previously under the same roof. I explained my reasoning in Talk: Car (mythology): "The knowledge on the figures and their attributes is certainly very scarce and open to debate and but that should not justify treatment in bulk." If you feel that these Cars should be grouped together like the Kings of Lydia, by all means re-merge them. In time, the reasoning may be extended to other similar cases. Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 06:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I certainly agree that it is not good to treat two persons together in the manner Car (mythology) did, but the articles that result are so short, and unlikely to grow, that it might indeed be better if you merged them into a list. But there's no particular reason to ask me about that: I only closed one discussion and generally prefer to spend my time here on rice rats, rather than ancient kings with funny names. Ucucha 12:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

The base material is short but the viewpoints published by scholars offer ground for growth. For Atys, it is also the name of a divinity, generally spelled Attis in that case. One scholar thinks the name (and therefore the divinity) is Phrygian (James George Frazer, citing scholars's names just to emphasize my example), another that it is Lydian and Phrygian (Attis: Between Myth and History: King Priest and God: Maria Grazia Lancellotti) while another sees it as a Greek introduction to Anatolia (Jan N. Bremmer). As a principle, I make a move request rather making the move myself, but a move request also has the disadvantage of bringing together not very knowledgeable chattering classes who move from one move request to another to present their precious views or interchanges. I will make a new move request for the king to Atys (King of the Maeonians) to have a clearer Atys (disambiguation). Cretanforever (talk) 10:44, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I would be part of those chattering classes, so I don't think I have anything useful to say to you; organize things as you see fit until someone has a better idea. Ucucha 11:50, 25 March 2010 (UTC)